Systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus open approach for pancreaticoduodenectomy

Zhang, Hang; Xiang-hu, WU; Zhu, Feng; Shen, Ming; Tian, Rui; Shi, Changcheng; Wang, Xin; Xiao, Guangqin; Guo, Xiaomao; Wang, Min; Qin, Renyi

doi:10.1007/s00464-016-4864-3

Cited by 57 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During the recent years, there has been an increasing interest towards the use of minimally invasive and parenchymal‐sparing procedures in pancreatic surgery. Indeed, minimally invasive pancreatic surgery is currently employed with encouraging results in experienced centers to perform any pancreatic procedure, ranging from distal pancreatectomy to middle pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy, even for high demanding cases with vascular encasement . Beside the widely known merits of MIS in terms of faster recovery and shortened postoperative hospitalization, there is some evidence that favors the minimally invasive method over traditional celiotomy even on surgical morbidity and pathological outcomes .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatic enucleation. Systematic review and meta‐analysis of surgical outcomes

Guerra

Giuliani

Bencini

et al. 2018

Journal of Surgical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parenchymal sparing procedures are gaining interest in pancreatic surgery and recent studies have reported that minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation may be associated with enhanced outcomes when compared with traditional surgery. By meta-analyzing the available data from the literature, minimally invasive surgery is not at higher risk of pancreatic fistula and offers a number of advantages over conventional surgery for pancreatic enucleation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatic enucleation. Systematic review and meta‐analysis of surgical outcomes

Guerra

Giuliani

Bencini

et al. 2018

Journal of Surgical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy, Zhang et al 45 and Rooij et al 34 concluded that minimally invasive surgery is associated with a reduction in estimated blood loss, delayed gastric emptying, and a shorter hospital stay. However, the operative time is much longer than that of an open approach, higher mortality was observed in low-volume centers, and this procedure should be implemented only in centers with a structured training program 34,45 . Laparoscopic PD has not been included as a standard therapeutic approach for pancreatic surgeons.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pancreatoduodenectomy: Brazilian practice patterns

Waechter¹,

Amaral²,

Costa³

et al. 2018

HPB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Background: Pancreatoduodenectomy is a technically challenging surgical procedure with an incidence of postoperative complications ranging from 30% to 61%. The procedure requires a high level of experience, and to minimize surgery-related complications and mortality, a high-quality standard surgery is imperative. Aim: To understand the Brazilian practice patterns for pancreatoduodenectomy. Method: A questionnaire was designed to obtain an overview of the surgical practice in pancreatic cancer, specific training, and experience in pancreatoduodenectomy.

show abstract

“…While performing this systematic review, we did not find any randomized controlled trials on this topic; thus, the quality of included studies is limited. To our knowledge, there are several previously published systematic reviews comparing MIPD with open approach [34–36]. However, in most of them, there is a methodological bias due to the fact that they include in their analysis studies which apart from pancreatoduodenectomy report pancreatectomies altogether.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy—systematic review and meta-analysis

Pędziwiatr

Małczak

Pisarska

et al. 2017

Langenbecks Arch Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this systematic review was to compare minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) by using meta-analytical techniques.MethodologyMedline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies. Data from included studies were extracted for the following outcomes: operative time, overall morbidity, pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, blood loss, postoperative hemorrhage, yield of harvested lymph nodes, R1 rate, length of hospital stay, and readmissions. Random and fix effect meta-analyses were undertaken.ResultsInitial reference search yielded 747 articles. Thorough evaluation resulted in 12 papers, which were analyzed. The total number of patients was 2186 (705 in MIPD group and 1481 in OPD). Although there were no differences in overall morbidity between groups, we noticed reduced blood loss, delayed gastric emptying, and length of hospital stay in favor of MIPD. In contrary, meta-analysis of operative time revealed significant differences in favor of open procedures. Remaining parameters did not differ among groups.ConclusionOur review suggests that although MIPD takes longer, it may be associated with reduced blood loss, shortened LOS, and comparable rate of perioperative complications. Due to heterogeneity of included studies and differences in baseline characteristics between analyzed groups, the analysis of short-term oncological outcomes does not allow drawing unequivocal conclusions.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00423-017-1583-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus open approach for pancreaticoduodenectomy

Abstract: MIPD can be a reasonable alternative to OPD with potential advantages. However, further large-volume, well-designed RCTs with extensive follow-ups are suggested to confirm and update the findings of our analysis.

Cited by 57 publications

References 33 publications

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatic enucleation. Systematic review and meta‐analysis of surgical outcomes

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatic enucleation. Systematic review and meta‐analysis of surgical outcomes

Pancreatoduodenectomy: Brazilian practice patterns

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy—systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About